Notice that Moore doesn't refute what the guy said, he just questions his motives. Classic propaganda technique.
You have to read the whole article. He successfully refutes the question of the gun at the bank, but I don't know why anyone questioned him on that in the first place. Quick research shows that is completely possible. But he does a poor job of defending his Denver Heston speech and Lockheed Martin pieces, and doesn't even go into some of the more glaring errors.